Posts made by Afrikakorps

Do you agree that when the UK is as good as beaten (India taken, UK Europe income of 10 IPC) you are able to take out Russia even while declaring war in G3 or G4? No Sea Lion (London) but Gold Rush (Cairo)

@DessertFox599:

Another advantage to doing afrika korps is that if your playing with ygh rules thats a vp right there.

Also i think japan should do a calcutta crush along with afrika korps. That way, uk cant send fighters from india into egypt, otherwise lose infia and/or the possibility  of taking india back

I agree, this is crucial. The Axis should focus on taking out the UK, however not by Sea Lion but by taking over India, Middle East + Africa.

Greetings fellow generals,

After having analyzed a lot of battles and forum discussions it seems most Axis and Allies games go like this: Germany tries Sea Lion (suboptimal) or Russia. However in most games Germany fails to take Russia because of UK fighter inflow and even when it takes Russia, it needs to capture Egypt that has been heavily reinforced by the UK. We also know that Japan can do the India crush.

So why do we not go for Egypt first as Germany? It is a critical victory city netting 7IPC and a big blow for the UK. Why do we not focus on the UK first in the first turns? As the Axis we can control at least the first turns with diplomacy. Against concentrated Axis focus India can be captured in turn 4 while the middle east, egypt and africa can be captured by Germany and Italy. UK pacific gone gives Japan a much easier game, a UK europe with 16 IPC income is neutralized. All this while all Axis have expanded their economies considerably while that of the USA + USRR has remained the same.

This leads to my conclusion of the Afrika Korps strategy, but I also wanted to pose this fundamental question here to discuss.

Italy can attack Turkey with all its bomber, 2 fighters, 2 tanks, 2 artillery and 2 infantry. You buy a transport I1 and keep it with the other fleet

Germany will attack Caucasus in G3 and hold it all turns after because it can concentrate more force there than Russia. Only way for Russia to at least give a fight is surrendering Leningrad, which is fine by me.

Utilize Yunnan at all costs when Japan gives you the chance.

However in case be reinforced heavy as I would also always do as Japan, Yunnan is not the way to go. Against a strong and prepared Japan a reinforced Yunnan is good, as he can concentrate his power. Instead it is better to force him to divide his power. You have 5 flanks you can all put pressure on.

North: 18 Russians
China: Guerilla chinese that never die until you hunt them
South: UK that can become Pacific Russia when not handled
Money Islands: here is the money for the Allies + Axis, crucial to take fast
SZ6: Even with mininal forces of USA, Japan needs to defend this zone against Hawaii fleet

When all 5 zones are well defended + played, so not giving away any free space or battles, it is difficult for Japan to keep reinforcing all areas with sparse land troops, it needs to focus.

More and more I am realizing that as the Allies, you need to think as the attacker, not as the defender, as the attacker always provides you with the initiative. So not stacking Yunnan, Egypt, Moscow. Instead always be on the counter-attack limiting Axis movement. Axis have so much initi power they will expand no matter what, however as soon they have expanded they become divided, then is the chance of the Allies to counter-attack. Russia + UK are the most important Allies in this play, the USA less important and a more supporting role balancing the Axis.

Gargantua I don’t have the time to watch your games now, hopefully can do it a later moment in time. Thank you for joining the discussion, before nobody seemed to think a counter-attacking Russia was the best defense, now you seem to have convinced most.

I will buy 6 tanks R1, after it I first stack my artillery pools both at Novgorod and Bryansk, I want minimum 6 at both strongholds. The benefit from stratrgically placed artillery is that they are cheaper while having similiar effect as tanks + upgrading your initial infantry. After building those pools, I will be producing a mix of tanks and mech. Russia is the perfect place to have 2-move units, I will upload my studies about its geography later.

I am intrigued about the Siberian infantry, but have always considered it a waste of pressure from the Allies. Me and my brother have become expert at the defense of China with forces from Russia, China and UK and our Axis have not managed to wipe us.

Don’t you miss the 7 IPC that are lost so easily? Does the infantry mass really make such a difference in G8? How do you play your USA?

So working further on the target.

Take Caucasus, Leningrad, Stalingrad and Egypt in G5

Build major in Romania G1
Build med fleet in SZ100 G2
Italy takes Turkey I2
Germany start producing fast troops
Afrika Korps take Caucasus G3
Tropical Fleet takes Egypt G3
Afrika Korps takes Middle East/Stalingrad G4
Germany takes Leningrad G5

Collect +/- 100 IPC G5

Italy will be making 35-40 IPC I5
Japan will be making 70 IPC J5

Axis making +/- 200 IPC per turn

Gargantua you are a genius! I will be buying tanks next time R1 and adding artillery and mech the later turns. The heavy investment in mobile power will suit Russia well. I considered this earlier but decided on the more numbers - - > artillery + mech.

However I am not convinced about the withdrawal of the Russian forces, that is why I have not simply copied your Red Blitz that inspired me developing Russian strategies of my own. Because the USA will focus its first buys ans initial fleet on Europe (Bright Skies) I feel the Siberians play a crucial role in the battle of China, as moving them to Moscow gives Japan freedom to destroy china + UK. In my battles in uses that stack with great effect against Japan so far giving China some crucial time to survive and remain annoying.

Having figured out my new Allied strategy The Russian Tide + The Bright Skies and played it two times, my father will be playing the Axis one more time where I can perfect my Allied play. After that, I am the Axis again, and I am looking forward playing this strategy.

My first and only game Russia did no retreat from its borders and I took the opportunity by invading Russia. All out on Novgorod failed horribly because of bad luck, but I still took the victory, unfortunately not through the Afrika Korps play but common strategy.

That is why I will be working on the Afrika Korps strategy for the Axis again, as I still think it has a lot of potential.

Requester thank you for the excellent outline of the strategy we discussed in the Bright Skies thread and the start of the discussion on this Russian strategy.

My view is that in any case, the first build of Russia should be ideally artillery and mechanized infantry. You already have a lot of infantry at your disposal, but not much artillery (3 total) or mech (2 total) while both of them greatly enhance your already existing infantry. While they add the same defense value when combined in a stack, artillery double the attack value of your already existing infantry while mechanized infantry can attack from longer distances or reinforce stacks faster.

Especially reinforcing stacks is noteworthy, as Russia has limited production output. Only Moscow can produce 10 units per turn, while Leningrad and Stalingrad only 3. Ukraine will be lost in any case, but also holds least value for Russia. Leningrad however is a big IPC swing into German favour, and also ensures losing Archangel next turn and thus the S125 NO. Losing it is a 20 IPC swing in the Germany vs Russia battle. However reinforcing Leningrad can only be done in time with mobile mechanized infantry, normal infantry would take to long. Also, in case Germany ignores Leningrad, normal infantry would be too slow to react and will lag behind in both offense and defense.

Therefore I will always be building a mix of 9 artillery / mechanized infantry. Only when the defense of Moscow is imminent, I might buy infantry instead.

The greatest proposal for infantry instead of artilery / mech infantry is the amount of numbers. Yes, on the defense, you can mass 3 more infantry per turn, a difference of 12 units before G5. However my assumption is that the threat a mixed force provides consisting out of the initial infantry supported by build artillery and mechanized infantry, makes up for the numbers, as it can counter-attack when Germany has different stacks besides 1 big concentrated group.

This is based on the same idea that Japan needs to concentrate its fleet when the USA is active in the pacific. This forces Japan to pick one goal and go for it, while without the USA attack threat, Japan could disperse its fleet and attack multiple locations at once, therefore expanding faster.

A bit more about the ideal situation for the Red Tide. The ideal defense perimeter is Novgorod + Bryansk, as they can reach most of Russia, while combo-attack a German force trying to sneak to Moscow through Belarus. Also mechanized infantry from Russia can reinforce both strongholds fast, while both Novgorod + Bryansk fast movers could reinforce or attack each other in case of tactical retreat.

All warfare is based on deception. This sort of warfare greatly enhances your possibility to deceive your enemy. In my last game Germany marches to Leningrad with overwhelming numbers. In both Vyborg as Karelia was 5 infantry while most forces + tanks were in the Baltic States. I had build 6 artillery in Novgorod in my three turns while mechanized infantry from Russia. I divided my big stack of Novgorod in two attacking groups to Vyborg and Karelia while I moved my fast movers to Smolensk and Archangel while my Bryansk stack (also with 6 artillery) remained in place in case he did not took the bait of Leningrad. Therefore my force was divided into 4 much smaller forces, while I took out 10 infantry with minimal losses. Germany took the bait and took Novgorod with its main stack, but the airforce he had concentrated had no good targets. He also reinforced Finland with some troops and airplanes. In my turn, all 4 groups attacked Leningrad, and combined they were bigger than the main German stack, that had lost the 10 infantry from Scandinavia and had its airplanes in another zone. I destroyed the German stack while I lost all my infantry (the 18 initial ones) but my artillery and mechanized infantry survived to directly pressure German more defensively for 1-2 turns as he had to regroup / reinforce. The deception of my different groups led to him taking the bait. The buys of artillery and mechanized infantry had allowed me to set up the bait and massacre him in different steps, while I was on the offense instead of defense. So even when the dice were not going into my favour, I could have retreated into one of the zones I was attacking from.

This reinforced my assumption that favour is with the attacker, as that is the one who controls what happens and when it stops.

Another thing that mechanized infantry allowed me to do. First it destroyed the German main stack, however the Axis attacked with all its forces and Japan was now close to taking Moscow with about 10 tanks and 10 airplanes. The mech could quicy reinforce to my eastern flank and attack those tanks with artillery that I build in Moscow. Also the 3 starting planes were highly effective all my turns. The supply lines for Japan were so far and with his tanks destroyed, he had no choice than to retreat its planes. My troops and focus on the north + japan had in the meantime allowed Germany to get to Rostov, able to take Caucasus and Stalingrad next turn. Again the mech could relocate and take back the Caucasus + reinforce Stalingrad just in time.

In short, the mechanized infantry allowed me to be everywhere on the right time, which made the Axis attacks very frustrating as even while he attacked me on all flanks, I could be where needed because of my mobility and good use of Russia geography.

We combined this Russian strategy the Red Tide with a Taranto attack + Bright Skies USA strategy. If Italy wanted any chance of survival, Germany had to help. All that help is less focus on Russia. My brother that played the UK played a very good game, even while rolling terrible in the first 3 rounds. Luck was absolutely at the Axis side, but our avoidance and counter-attacks won us the game.

I do not see how in case of 100% Russia, Germany is going to prevent the early death of Italy and liberation of France, as the USA has its invasion fleet ready to attack Gibraltar after USA1.

@Ichabod:

Anyone on here looking for a PBEM game? Please private message me.

Maybe Afrikakorps you could teach me your successful allies’ strategy?

I would love to. Also started two other forum games to test it out online. Unfortunately I don’t have the time this month and will be travelling the months after. As soon as I return I will have the time, so lets play then!

@Requester45:

I will open a thread soon. To discuss these strategies is great. The different outcomes of the games using these strategies relies on the individual players on both sides of the game. It will be interesting to see these strategies implemented and tweaked into a nice refined workable strategy.

I agree, and I see think you nailed them both already some posts earlier

My last battle USA was purchasing bombers in first two turns. Then turn 3-4 was used for pacific fleet as German had focused on the med and convoying UK with its buys and given Russia some space. Turn 5-6 bombers again as Germany had build extra fleet to keep its Baltic fleet alive. Afterwards just bombers to make sure any Axis fleet in Europe got directly destroyed + started pounding German factories.

So USA bomber buys are dependent on the situation. Is Germany messing around? Send your bombers against Japan + start building fleet in USA3.

To make Bright Skies work, just the first two turns building bombers is enough, third if Germany has build some additional fleet or protection for the Baltic fleet.

The initial post of this thread is from my first tuning, I got some more experience and feedback in the meantime. Will update it. You don’t need full bomber buys, however getting 9 in two first turns is always worth it I think. Lets call it the Bright Skies USA opener instead or something.

Great idea to start other topics about the Red Tide + Japan strategy. This one is called Bright Skies, but has devoted more time to Red Tide, so not sure how best to call this one.

Great call, I agree! Like the name of the Red Tide also.

This topic however has been about combining the Bright Skies and the Red Tide, as both strategies without the other will not work. Russia will not be able to put pressure on Germany is USA bombers does not force this early in the game. On the contrary the heavy USA bombers against Germany can only work if combined Allied effort on the mainland manage to hold up Japan with little help from USA.

@Requester45:

So the result was this way because the German play didn’t commit 100% to the Moscow push. This to me sounds like a German player who couldn’t make up his mind as to whether he wanted Russia or London. That is why the game resulted in an allied victory.

Yes he is an inexperienced Axis player that this time tried to help Italy in the med, and get to the oil through that way. I am not saying that what I did will work against 100% play against Russia so succesfully, however I think I can master this strategy of Russia in the counter-attack as its defense and it will work better than just building infantry and some spare artillery.

Against Italian can openers, yes annoying, but the first turn they can really so something is turn 4 as they lag behind the Germans who are advanxing anyways. Even then it is not such a big deal, as long you keep the defense of Moscow able to withstand the mobile part of the German army. Yes when Germany only builds mech + armor and Italy also alone mech, this becomes dangerous. Any deviation from that path as Germany benefits Russia. If Germany goes 100% Russia, the other Allies should be able to make Germany pay for this.

Yesterday I discovered another important reason for Russia to build mainly artillery and mech. On the defense, Germany can use its Luftwaffe, which adds a lot of power to his force making it much stronger. On the defense however, especially in newly taken zones, there can be no aircraft, making Germany much weaker on the defense than on the offense in Russia.

We played another live game yesterday and the Allies took the victory. I am very happy with my preparations in this topic, as they all worked! I got to take Iraq, Italian Africa and even Sicily/Sardinia.

I had build mainly mech + art every turn, first more art, then mainly mech for fodder. It worked extremely well as I got surrounded by all Axis as Japan had pushed lots of tanks and planes through China. Because of the mobility I was able to fend off every attack, and could retreat where he was too strong. Both Novgorord and Bryansk I retreated them on the turn he could attack, making his luftwaffe useless every time, and then retook it on the counter-attack.

I could match Germany because of the USA bombers. Having lost its baltic fleet last time early to the bombers. Now he build a very strong baltic fleet. Needless to say, Scandinavia had to wait until R6 when USA had finally enough bombers to take it down. All this German fleet was ofcourse not invested in land troops, that gave Russia the time and forces to overpower Germany eventually.

OK, so by studying the Russian map, reinforcing Novgorod + Bryansk creates the ideal defense perimeter for Russia to threaten with a counter-attack.

We have agreed that the defense of Moscow is always the priority of Russia. You will know yourself when holding Leningrad will become impossible, this is especially the case when Germany invested in the Baltic Fleet.

Also artillery and mechanized infantry are the best build for R1, add infantry on how focused and lucky Germany is, otherwise try to keep the defense of strategic points.

Now I studied the best way to counter-attack Germany itself, might you face the opportunity that you destroyed their stack with your counter-attack from Novgorod + Bryansk.

The best location to attack Germany is from Eastern Poland to Slovakia, especially when you have mobile forces. As Germany needs to protect its capital at all costs, there are chances you will be over to take over the Balkans while Germany needs to keep its forces in Berlin. Slovakia provides most borders to other countries, therefore more options that you can push against Germany and overpower him as he will be unable to defend them all, in contrary to for example Poland.

@larrymarx:

Yeah, I suppose I shouldn’t be derailing a good conversation like that.

My perspective on all this fancy Russia stuff is that it’s important to study in order to have an idea of Russia’s hidden potential in this game, but then at the same time to recognize that in many (perhaps most) games it will be infeasible to try to act on that potential. If Germany blows a couple rolls or starts throwing money into the water, then yes, you immediately do bright skies or red skies/red waters/red tigers/bright tigers/whatever grand Allied fantasy you’ve spent hours coming up with, and that’s how you win that particular game. The point is you don’t just start doing it before you see a strategic situation you can capitalize on where you know you will be at an advantage when you do.

Exactly! That is why it is a bad idea to build mainly normal infantry as Russia, as you will not be able to capitalize on mistakes. The plan is to hold Novgorod, if this seems impossible, retreat back to Moscow as usual. However this retreat becomes much easier when the infantry is mechanized.

Trying to hold Novgorod might be a fancy plan dependent on mistakes of Germany. However building mainly mechanized infantry is always usefull for Russia. Depending on how likely it comes to the defense of Moscow, start adding normal infantry. As long you place 10 units per turn in Moscow, what is the difference?

@IKE:

@Afrikakorps:

I also like to share my view on Russian economy, to support why I am so positive Russia can become most exciting nation to play instead of most boring.

RUSSIA = 30 IPC
But many national objecties to grow

Siberia: +7 IPC
SZ125: +5 IPC
Iraq: +5 IPC
Italian Somaliland + Libya: +7 IPC
Italian Islands: +6 IPC
Scandinavia: +11 IPC

That is +41 IPC, PER TURN for a total of 71 IPC without entering German borders (as those can be easily defended by Germany)

How is Russia getting the Italian islands? �They’re loading on US/UK transports in the Med?

Yes, USA pacific fleet comes to Med with two transports. Once those transports are empty they come pick up the Russian fortune seekers ;)

@Requester45:

Right, so some of these you don’t achieve until late game. The Scandinavia gambit is controversial because if the German player is skilled, they will not lose Scandinavia, or if they did, it’s because they wanted Russia to waste time and units from defending Novgorod and or Moscow. I feel as though the reason most players play a conservative “boring” game with Russia is because of trial and error. When I first began playing AA years ago, everyone wanted to play an aggressive Russian game including myself, because in human nature. You want to have some fun battles and out maneuver the enemy and out smart the enemy. However through trial and error we find that Russia cannot keep up with the ever expanding German forces. Germany rapidly gains IPCs and Russian territories, while Russia is slowly losing IPCs and retreating. Russia cannot compete in this way, and instead are forced into a shell (Moscow). The only way that Russia is going to be able to compete in a way in which you describe is if the German player has dedicated their game strategy to taking out the UK both in the Atlantic, and the Mediterranean. Which is not the case most of the time, because Russia is a sleeping giant. If you look into the war in real life, Hitler realized this too late. He knew that he would have to attack Russia and have a two front war and by waiting too long he allowed for Russia to gain too much momentum.

You will likely be right as you all got more than 100 battles under your belt and tried everything. However so far the arguments were that Novgorod would fall in any case, or they could just bypass it and take Moscow. I have proven these arguments wrong so far by theory, so with more arguments you could break down the hypothesis.